| Comment Number: | OL-10510622 |
| Received: | 3/16/2005 10:49:11 AM |
| Subject: | Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, Request for Comment |
| Title: | National Security Personnel System |
| CFR Citation: | 5 CFR Chapter XCIX and Part 9901 |
| No Attachments |
Comments:
The DoD civilian workforce is being asked to agree to something that hasn't been defined well enough to make a decision about whether it is good or not. From reading the proposal, the protections that the civilian workforce has depended on over the course of history is being ended because the SECDEF wants to make this more like a business. Well, where are the profits from all of this savings going to go? Back to the taxpayer-which, by the way, includes the civilian workforce if they are still working. This system sounds like the way of the workforce in the 19th and early 20th Centuries, when the owner determined what each person earned, worked and lived. That is what brought about the uprising and steady increase in unions until they were able to meet across bargaining tables. Well, the government doesn't work on a profit basis, but the workforce is going to be rated on a system that uses that for the rating basis if this is implemented. Will the supervisor, who now has ultimate power, be rated by the ones supervised for promotion, raises and other benefits so that favoritism is removed/elimated? Undoubtably, that isn't in the plans since the SECDEF wants more control over the "chain of command", while the civilian counterpart welcomes those 360 reviews. This proposal is flawed from the start to the end in the belief that the workforce is not doing the job it was hired to do. The removal of the majority of the protective measures for the civilian workforce is not going to be enhanced by the review board that is selected from within DoD to hear grievances and other issues, since their interest lies in pleasing their bosses because they are rated by them. Talk about letting the fox into the hen house! This is it! Another point that isn't discussed in great detail is what protection is the civilian workforce going to have when they are deployed to a war zone to replace the soldier, sailor or airman that is now carrying a weapon issued to him? Are you going to expect the civilian to also carry weapons and be proficient at the skills that we train the professional weeks to accomplish? The thought that the civilian won't need to carry firearms is not feasible since we have been fighting two non-linear, non-conventional wars for several years now. To think that the civilian won't be under fire is not credible or realistic. The civilian workforce is over 2 times the average age of the soldier. Who will be taking care of his family when the inevitable happens? The government won't even consider such a thing since the civilian has benefits through his employment. Just not the same ones that a soldier, sailor or airman does. This is just a bad idea that is going to cause a great deal of frustration and anger if it is implemented.